Perpetual Innovation

Category: CO2

  • CO2 xGame Winners in Canada. Losers in USA?

    Wow. What do you do when the horses are already outta the gate?
    What do you do with the CO2 is already into the atmosphere? This is the idea of capturing that 400 parts per million of CO2 out of the atmosphere after it’s already, well, up in the error — oops… I mean — up in the air.
    Here are the winners of the XGames competition on CO2. This $20M competition is to figure out ways to carbon capture and sequester (CCS). Unlike some industrial byproducts, CO2 can have a value (bottling, for example, to give you that happy fizz in your pop).

    Here’s some info on this big competition in Canada: CBC News discusses competition sponsored by Canada’s Oil Sands Innovation Alliance and U.S. company NRG.

    One of the 9 finalist, Ingenuity Labs, emulates photosynthesis to remove carbon dioxide from smoke stacks and such. They use a photosynthesis-like process to extract the carbon and make several industrial products out of the extract. True, this is a lot like planting a tree, but you have to wait 20 years for the wood, vs the immediate gratification of industrial products.

    A very cool concept is by Carbicrete. Take out CO2 from an emissions source (say a smoke stack) and infuse it into concrete where the carbon is happily sequestered and it actually strengthens the concrete. (Note that concrete is a leading industrial source of CO2 emissions.)

    While Canada is moving full forward with sustainability initiatives, the US is set to make a major shift in the other direction. Trump’s Pruitt pick for the EPA might result in two departments of Energy. (Facts and miss-facts about Pruitt.)

    The US has never had an energy policy. Carter was the last to propose one. Obama kinda had one, but without any legislative support, he was force-feeding it through the EPA. No matter who you are, that’s not the right way. So the Clean Energy Plan, is about to get the can!…

    That means the the job of the CCS might turn out to be far, far bigger in the future, as we try to burn up the last century or so of fossil fuels over the next hundred years.

    We here at SustainZine consider “conservative” this way: The bestest, cheapest, cleanest gallon of gas is the one never extracted, never processed and never burned. The bestest, cheapest, cleanest tonne of coal is the one never extracted, never processed, and never burned (scrubbing or no scrubbing).

  • Obama’s Climate Policy Is a Hot Mess – WSJ

    Obama’s Climate Policy Is a Hot Mess – WSJ:

    Bjorn Lomborg may have been best know for his massive tomb of a book entitled The Skeptical Environmentalist. Lomborg (2007) in The Skeptical Environmentalist: Measuring the Real State of the World “may be the best source for reviewing the facts about quality of life, global
    warming, and the optimal approaches for addressing the issues.” (Hall, Taylor, Zapalski, & Hall, 2009, p. 5)

    Apparently he has since gone off to consult for oil & gas interest. That’s not all bad, but it does mean that he may not be unbiased as seemed to be the case during his Skeptical days.

    Bjorn talks about, essentially, the bang for the buck ($US, in this case). The current Obama plan doesn’t do much to move the global warming needle, especially given the costs. On the one hand, Obama will say that we have to start somewhere. In this case, and in several others, Bjorn simply says that this won’t do much good. A smart guy like that should suggest better alternatives.

    We, at SBPlan, argue that there are two monster places to start. AND neither requires the special help of government, really. Both are energy efficiency (EE) focused. Two EE business models that SBP especially likes are related to telecommuting using remote work centers and a pay-forward model
    of promoting energy efficiency in all buildings – residential, commercial and
    government. Since both of these initiatives save money, they offer a special win-win-win of sustainability (Employees, Employers and Environment, in this case).

    I’m a little disappointing that Bjorn has been simply complaining about the expense and the likely lack of success from various government initiatives, not offering up his own recommendations. It’s easy to complain and stop progress, but I give no respect to someone who does not offer up better alternatives. In the case of our non-sustainable practices of energy, the olde business as usual (BAU) model is a failed business model; it is only a matter of time for this living beyond our means model of existence will come crashing down.

    Bjorn offers up more research, presumably to make renewables more affordable. And touts the Fracking-NatGas revolutions as a massive windfall for reducing our pollution and greenhouse gases away from coal. NatGas is both good and bad; it shifts us away from really dirty energy associated with coal. Yeah!:-) But it reduced the costs and availability of all oil, gas and coal such that we may have tagged on another 50 years worth of fossil fuels to global economies before we really start to run low(er) and basic economics starts to really solves our addiction to fossil fuels. 

    If you read Bjorn’s Skeptical Environmentalist, you will find that he totally believes that there is global warming and that man is a big (?major?) contributor. When you read this book you will agree, even before including the 10 record hot years since he published in 2007. What he does say, forcefully then, and now, is that we need to focus on the efforts that will result the move benefits. Huge government spending on reducing CO2, especially in developing countries, may have little, none, or even negative results. 

    Bjorn ended up in a big tiff over the 2007 book Skeptical Environmentalist. If it was an opinion piece then it would be okay to take the liberties that he did with interpreting the results; but as a scientific book, he had gone way to far. The  Danish Committees on Scientific Dishonesty (DCSD) in Bjorn’s home country, charged him with academic dishonesty in the book. This ruling went against Bjorn. On appeal the charge of scientific dishonesty was sent back for a do-over, where it stalled out.

    Bjorg’s follow Skeptical Environmentalist book(s) have titles that start with “Cool it!”, concentrating on what to do that will likely have the most (short-term) benefits. 

    Bjorg, don’t just complain in op-eds about Obama and the other 200 countries who signed the Paris greenhouse deal this April (agreed to in Dec 2015). The average person reading this op-ed would think that we all should do nothing and wait for Bill Gates Foundation to find a cure. Give people real suggestions for actions. Or, are you simply trying to sell your books and consulting?

    References

    Hall, E., Taylor, S., Zapalski, C., & Hall, T.
    (2009). Sustainability in education: Green in the facilities, but not in the
    classrooms. Proceedings of the Society for Advancement of Management,
    USA.
    Lomborg, Bjorn. (2007). The skeptical environmentalist: Measuring the real state of the world. NY:
    Cambridge University Press.

    ‘via Blog this’

  • Climate Leadership | Climate Leadership Plan | Alberta.ca

    Climate Leadership | Climate Leadership Plan | Alberta.ca:

    WOW.

    On the eve of the humongous climate meetings in Paris next week (week after Thanksgiving in USA), Canada has stepped up to the plate on addressing climate changes.

    Alberta is the home of Coal and Oil Sands: two of the great game changers in addressing pollution in general and Greenhouse Gas emissions (GHG).

    There are several reports, but one is to simply charge a tax per metric tonne (yes, I know that’s the colourful way to spell ton) of CO2. The price will move up from $15 to $30 per ton of CO2 by 2019.

    In electric generation, the big game changer is to switch away from coal in general.

    By 2030 in Alberta, “There will be no pollution from coal-fired

    electricity generation.” The focus will be on reduce electrical needs and switching to NatGas and Renewables.

    But for Alberta, capping and steadily reversing the oil sands is a very big game changer.

    With the oil glut keeping oil prices down below $50 per barrel for the foreseeable future, Alberta should be ramping down oil production anyway. (I think oil sands requires $70 to $80 to be profitable.).

    The Carbon Taxes will be used: to offset increased living costs for poorer people, to assist with transition to renewables and other research.

    For those still skeptical about Global Warming: Look at the pix of Athabasca Glacier over 100 years (well 98 really). Or look at any pictures over 40 years related to Glacier Bay in Alaska. Or, just a little south from Alberta, give a look at Glacier National Park in Montana (soon to be renamed Glacier-Less National Park).
    ‘via Blog this’

  • Is 2015 The Year Soil Becomes Climate Change’s Hottest Topic? | ThinkProgress

    Is 2015 The Year Soil Becomes Climate Change’s Hottest Topic? | ThinkProgress:

    Global Soil Week was last week.

    It slipped by without even a stain on the knees for most of us.

    Give a look at this recount of the week’s activities and the progress to address the issues we are generating for out soil, our top soil and the planet in general.

    This is really ugly. One estimate is that we could deplete all top soil within 60 years. (Gotta question this one a little bit, but the concept is valid.)

    And new studies show that the problem gets worse and worse as the temperatures of the planet rise.

    Really ugly.

    Smarter ag management and no-till farming is a great place to start on the critical, really CRITICAL, environmental issue.

    ‘via Blog this’

  • Climate-change deniers are in retreat – The Washington Post

    Climate-change deniers are in retreat – The Washington Post:

    It will be nice to move past the non-debate about is there global warming, and move off into the real debate.

    We are all living unsustainable lives with non-sustainable business models. What is our plan to move toward sustainability. Singly and collectively?

    The argument that it doesn’t do any good for us to do something if China and India continue consuming is sad and ironic.

    For a century, we in the US with only 4.5% of the worlds population, have consumed about 1/4 of all the worlds resources consumed/used… Coal, Iron, Gas, etc.

    We have produced about 1/4 of the worlds byproducts for a century (pollution and CO2).

    We at this blog like to focus on those things that can be done within weeks, not decades. Energy Efficiency (EE) initiatives can pay for themselves in weeks, with a perpetuity of savings forever after. Telecommuting can result in a perpetuity of savings for ever (until you start a new job that requires a commuting).

    We argue that nobody anywhere can reasonably believe that the price we pay at the pump of oil and at the meter for coal power is accurate and represents the true cost. Gas taxes continue to pay less and less of the US road maintenance, for example.

    Economist generally settle on a carbon tax as a better solution than either subsidizing green energy/cars or a cap-and-trade mechanism. There will never be a better time to initiate a carbon tax then 2014 when oil prices are half and should be reasonably low for a year or more.

    Or, we can continue to consume oil and gas like as if there is no tomorrow.

    ‘via Blog this’